Block access to web pages

Hello

I would like to block access to certain web pages in my computer, how can
this be done? I'm looking for software solution.

Thanks

Roger

rog

rogue wrote:
> Hello
>
> I would like to block access to certain web pages in my computer, how can
> this be done? I'm looking for software solution.
>
> Thanks
>
> Roger
>
>

If you have broadband it will be just as cheap to buy a modem-router
they usualy have an inbuilt web page blocking facility (modem-routers
are cheap these days will probably cost around the same as a software
solution) you could also do the hostfile trick whereby you edit your
hosts file on your local computer and loopback any site you do not want
accessed
eg. dirtypornsite 127.0.0.1

JD

rog wrote:
> Hello
>
> I would like to block access to certain web pages in my computer, how can
> this be done? I'm looking for software solution.
>
> Thanks
>
> Roger
>
>
c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts

Host file

127.0.0.1 coolwwwsearch.com
127.0.0.1 coolwebsearch.com
127.0.0.1 hi.studioaperto.net
127.0.0.1 www.webbrowser.tv
127.0.0.1 www.wazzupnet.com
127.0.0.1 gueb.com
127.0.0.1 kabex.com
127.0.0.1 www.hityou.com
127.0.0.1 miosearch.com
127.0.0.1 wazzupnet.com

This example will block the sites listed with loopback address on local
computer. Spybot S&D has a large number of known spyware sites blocked
if that is what your blocking, they do the work for you. I have seen
issues using this method when one has a large number of sites they wish
to block and their system memory is marginal. I have about 5000 lines
in my host file with as little as 256MB Ram on the virtual machine no
problem. When I reduce the memory availible to 128MB Ram on the
machine, the machine slows some in connecting with 5000 line hosts file.

The host file can speed up lookups to places you frequently visit by
putting the appropriate IP for the site instead of the loopback. This
entry will be used instead of the IP address. For example: you could
put the IP for google defined for the address www.playboy.com

64.233.161.99 www.playboy.com

And when the user puts in the www.playboy.com addy in their browser, the
google page would pop up instead. If one were to use a link to a
specific page at playboy a 404 (page not found) would "probably" result.

Winged

winged

It is easy in IE to restrict access to "allowed" web pages,
or to just a specific domain like *.edu, but blocking
specific web pages is pointless.

johns

johns

johns wrote:
> It is easy in IE to restrict access to "allowed" web pages,
> or to just a specific domain like *.edu, but blocking
> specific web pages is pointless.
>
> johns
>
>

IE has 20 plus known vulnerabilities that are actively being exploited
by various advertisers, spyware companies, and others of ill repute.
(see http://secunia.com/product/11/)

If you are relying on IE to keep the bad guys out, you have far bigger
problems, or soon may have, than blocking specific sites.

Firefox has 11 known current exploits, but none of the exploits allow a
remote site to run the code of their choice on the local machine with
system level permissions. http://secunia.com/product/4227/

The advantage of blocking via the host file versus using the browser is
many tools utilize the web to communicate that do not rely on the
browser permissions. If you block via the host file, communication is
blocked to the site irrespective of protocol. Ideally one blocks at
every level of the network, sites you do not wish to communicate with.
Blocking inside and outside interfaces on the perimeter firewall, on the
local machine firewall, and in the local machine host file. One should
use a layered blocking policy as well as a layered security policy.

One should NOT rely only on application level blocks to prohibit
communications.

One should also use the host file to identify a number of commonly used
login sites as this prohibits DNS poisoning attacks from inadvertently
releasing private login information.

Winged

winged

> IE has 20 plus known vulnerabilities that are actively being exploited
> by various advertisers, spyware companies, and others of ill repute. (see
> http://secunia.com/product/11/)

I don't. I actually know what I'm doing, and have a whole shitload
of computer labs successfully restricted to a local domain, or an
allow list of approved ( by me ) web sites. You guys with all the
jargon are about as valid as a Jr High School typing teacher.
Not one of those exploits has been able to crack IE 6 under XP
Pro set up the way I do it, and I can sit and watch them try.
Even better, I can also sit and watch the students in class try
to get out ( for more than 2 years now ), and they simply have
not been able to ... not once. Thing is, it is very easy to set up.
Your problem, is you buy in to the bullshit about exploits, and
never really question it. I simply break their backs, and they
can't touch my systems. A clue ... I don't "allow" the exe to
run .. or I aim it at a dummy proxy, and then I don't allow
the user to see the edit tab. It totally works.

johns

johns

If you are using a broadband modem, you can put a router between your modem
and the computer. Most of the routers offer a filter menu to block undesired
sites.

In Internet Explorer, under the Security tab, there is a Restricted Sites
option. In there, you can enter sites to block. When you do the MS security
updates, they add new sites to this along with the rest of the update. You
can go in there manualy, and add sites yourself.

I would not use additional software to block sites. I would do it with
Internet Explorer, or in the router. If you are sharing machines on a
network, it is best to do it in the router.

--


Greetings,

Jerry G.
============

"rog" <> wrote in message
news:TxkZd.157282$.. .
> Hello
>
> I would like to block access to certain web pages in my computer, how can
> this be done? I'm looking for software solution.
>
> Thanks
>
> Roger
>
>

Jerry G.

I would not go so far about saying that Firefox is absolutely safe. We have
some clients that have had hijackings, and they were using Firefox. By
default, it is better for security than IE, but it is still able to be
compromised.

If IE is properly setup, it is very safe. It takes some knowledge of how to
go about it. It involves having restrictions with Java, and scripting.

--


Greetings,

Jerry G.
============

"winged" <> wrote in message
news:d16kjc$...
> johns wrote:
> > It is easy in IE to restrict access to "allowed" web pages,
> > or to just a specific domain like *.edu, but blocking
> > specific web pages is pointless.
> >
> > johns
> >
> >
>
> IE has 20 plus known vulnerabilities that are actively being exploited
> by various advertisers, spyware companies, and others of ill repute.
> (see http://secunia.com/product/11/)
>
> If you are relying on IE to keep the bad guys out, you have far bigger
> problems, or soon may have, than blocking specific sites.
>
> Firefox has 11 known current exploits, but none of the exploits allow a
> remote site to run the code of their choice on the local machine with
> system level permissions. http://secunia.com/product/4227/
>
> The advantage of blocking via the host file versus using the browser is
> many tools utilize the web to communicate that do not rely on the
> browser permissions. If you block via the host file, communication is
> blocked to the site irrespective of protocol. Ideally one blocks at
> every level of the network, sites you do not wish to communicate with.
> Blocking inside and outside interfaces on the perimeter firewall, on the
> local machine firewall, and in the local machine host file. One should
> use a layered blocking policy as well as a layered security policy.
>
> One should NOT rely only on application level blocks to prohibit
> communications.
>
> One should also use the host file to identify a number of commonly used
> login sites as this prohibits DNS poisoning attacks from inadvertently
> releasing private login information.
>
> Winged

Jerry G.